I started to play around with Photoshop's sky replacement tool. This so easy to use and resurrected many missed opportunities!
Hell of a lot of fun, but I feels like I'm cheating. Any comments appreciated.
Unless you are a photojournalist I accept this kind of "cheating" where the intent is to provide a pleasing scene that your customer will enjoy looking at. I don't even require disclosure. My test is, "Do I like a photo or not and do I like it enough to buy it?"
Your presentation here is very pleasant. Nicely done.
I've spent some time thinking about this since Photoshop introduced this tool. I personally would not use it because it just doesn't feel right to me. I understand that this might be where the future of photography is heading and I think that it is unfortunate. Of course all of the tools that we do use in post processing probably would feel like cheating to photographers from an earlier era. While I generally try and take the view that it's the final result that matters in the pursuit of art, this doesn't feel like art to me. Taken to the logical conclusion, is it art if the entire photograph is produced with AI algorithms? I think that it cheapens the work of photographers who through skill and persistence produce outstanding photos. I also understand that everyone is different, but for me the allure of photography is getting out to enjoy the beauty that surrounds us, in addition to the challenge of trying to improve my craft.
fotofoow wrote:
I've spent some time thinking about this since Photoshop introduced this tool. I personally would not use it because it just doesn't feel right to me. I understand that this might be where the future of photography is heading and I think that it is unfortunate. Of course all of the tools that we do use in post processing probably would feel like cheating to photographers from an earlier era. While I generally try and take the view that it's the final result that matters in the pursuit of art, this doesn't feel like art to me. Taken to the logical conclusion, is it art if the entire photograph is produced with AI algorithms? I think that it cheapens the work of photographers who through skill and persistence produce outstanding photos. I also understand that everyone is different, but for me the allure of photography is getting out to enjoy the beauty that surrounds us, in addition to the challenge of trying to improve my craft. ...Show more →
Could not have said it better. Photography for me is all about getting out and capturing what my eyes see...not what my mind wants to see.
fotofoow wrote:
Taken to the logical conclusion, is it art if the entire photograph is produced with AI algorithms?
Art produced by AI is already selling for hundreds of thousands of dollars, although few if any of the pieces that are produced this way are photographs. If you're interested read up on the Non Fungible Token (NFT) art scene.
My take is similar to yours, I value photography that hews to a milder, more traditional form of manipulation. Of course the line between honesty and cheating is nothing more than a personal opinion in such a subjective realm as art.
Art and creativity and expression should always be a part of photography. But never let it hinder your journey to get out there and get the shot and become a better photographer.
So you are concerned that replacing a sky is cheating. What about images pumped up beyond any recognition including all those bright neon colors, intense night skies pasted onto well lit foregrounds, or all the other tricks of post processing we see frequently on this forum?
Document a scene or create an image or digital art..........difficult decisions at times.
I enjoyed the image at first look for sure so you found a wonderful balance of light and a good feel of what sky fit the lighting. Like others I guess any manipulation of the image is 'cheating' but maybe how the minds eye sees it is fair to share
I haven't seen any image from Maine I didn't like, so thanks for adding another
Camperjim wrote:
So you are concerned that replacing a sky is cheating. What about images pumped up beyond any recognition including all those bright neon colors, intense night skies pasted onto well lit foregrounds, or all the other tricks of post processing we see frequently on this forum?
I feel it is different to up the saturation or contrast in an image than to totally replace part of an image with another. I'm sure when you shot film, you used Velvia to pump up the green and blues and used Kodachrome to pump up the reds and yellows.
But everyone has their own lines they won't cross. I get satisfaction in getting out and capturing the nice scene in front of me...and if Mother Nature does not cooperate and gives me a dull sky, then I just have to get out another day and try again.
I'd hate to see things get to the point where one can purchase a bunch of sky images that they just incorporate into their images...that in my mind would be going backwards in photography.
Mar 12, 2021 at 09:18 AM
Mark Metternich Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
This will be a subject of endless opinions. So, in that vein, below are some quotes about opinions, for fun.
The FIRST one my wife taught me. I have mine of course, but will abstain.
“A tiger doesn’t lose sleep over the opinion of sheep.”
“There are as many opinions as there are people.”
“Your opinion is not my reality.”- Steve Maraboli
“Never judge someone by the opinion of others.”
“Try being informed instead of just opinionated.”
“Don’t let your opinion sway your judgment.”- Samuel Goldwyn
“Opinion is the medium between knowledge and ignorance.”- Plato
“The fewer the facts, the stronger the opinion.”- Arnold H. Glasow
“Just because they disagree, doesn’t mean you ain’t right.”- Toba Beta
“Don’t let someone else’s opinion of you become your reality.”- Les Brown
